lamps

It's amazing that the documentary was conceived in such a way that, in addition to cinephiles, it would be equally interesting for the average viewer. Okay, I'm sure not everyone is going to like the 108 static shots, but I still bow to Frémaux, who has taken the trouble to give the most classic pieces of cinema such a new adventurous touch and a sense of joy in discovering the first steps of today's most influential global medium. And the post-credit scene is better than all of Marvel's. :D

A work hardly comparable to anything else I've ever seen. The tale about the immortal woman/guy makes it difficult to connect to the main character, but it does not lack likeable humour, insight and a lot of interesting ideas that directly make you think (the main character often looks into the camera and addresses the audience). Tilda Swinton was born for this role, and Sally Potter leads this feminist costume masquerade with admirable formal eloquence and stability. I recommend it.

The attempt to combine the most classical of classic detective stories with modern filmmaking techniques is commendable, but not quite effective. I appreciate Branagh's clear vision, his courage to come up with his own ideas, and his absolute commitment to the story and the main character, but the result lacks a single memorable passage, and, especially in the second half, it hits a monotonous, old-fashioned note that doesn't fit well with his intentions to make an energetic version of the case of the level-headed intellectual. It's very pretty to look at and the stellar cast is a delight, but it's still more predictable and less cool than would be ideal.

Combining several Marvel movies into one lavish frame could have turned out much worse ("much" being the understatement), but it's still definitely not the best Marvel movie ever made. The episodic structure is fine and makes perfect sense, but its execution occasionally lags depending on one not-so-functional equation, namely, too many characters for too few supporting story motivations. Thanos is the central and most developed character, perhaps surprisingly, and it is his line that’s the strongest and holds everything else together – the only other character with his own grip on the storyline is Thor, while the rest of the cast is somehow bolted onto the expected Marvel-meeting, and more than ever I found it blatantly obvious how the possibilities of the fictional world are being handled clumsily, only for the characters to quickly move to pre-conceived positions and for the creators to leave the door open for future twists. There are so many characters that the switches between their lines are a bit clunky, and some of them get a volume that is inadequate to their overall importance (especially the Captain); and at times it relies only on humour, dropping jokes like Chandler and Rick and Morty, while in the next scene the audience is silenced by Shakespearean melodrama. Maybe I sound too critical, but don't judge me in advance, I still liked it a lot. Despite recycling the template of a rebellion against an all-powerful enemy, and delaying the climax in the service of a final battle that only serves to distract from one of the key themes, the film doesn't lack terrific charge and fatality, and manages to evoke exactly the kind of fan reactions in every situation that the MCU has been primarily aiming for a decade now. All in all, it does grind, but if the scenes are supposed to be purely entertaining, the viewer will laugh a lot (for me personally, the perfect Guardians and Tony's interaction with Dr. Strange lead the way), and if we're supposed to shed a tear, we're not far from it. While I'm not entirely convinced that his plan to wipe out half the universe is the product of anything higher than an advanced stage of manic insanity, Thanos is definitely the best comic book villain ever who doesn't come across as ridiculous and whose actions force the heroes to simply have no choice but to act within a clear and well-layered deadline. It's full of last-minute rescue clichés, of course, but the brothers in the director's chair aren't afraid to surprise and push the envelope from the start, so it's hard to guess who's going to go under the grim reaper's scythe – and when they do, it has the right effect. Overall, I'm very curious about the second instalment and how far the filmmakers will allow the laws of what can still happen in the that universe to be transformed, because this is nothing but one bite of the apple, regardless of how well they've managed to create a film with a satisfyingly contained and supportive framework...... In conclusion, if I had to choose which of this year's two much-anticipated blockbusters – Ready Player One and The Avengers – left me with greater cinephilic and purely superficial satisfaction, it's definitely Spielberg's geek gem, it’s told with far greater ease and formal ingenuity. And in the end, I'll admit it, that if I were naturally made for this endless haggling about how much even superheroes have to suffer and how hard they have it in a world with real human feelings, I would certainly give it five stars without blinking an eye. :)) 80%

Two stars mainly for the fact that most of the characters are avid beer drinkers (yeah, even the ants) and that the creators make fun of themselves. Otherwise, a very uninteresting addition to the ranks of C-grade homage to classic science fiction that lags behind the entertaining Eight Legged Freaks in all respects. It won't make you throw up and at least it’ll make you fancy a beer, but it couldn't be more amateurish most of the time.

Audiovisually, perhaps the most beautiful documentary imaginable, it's got more punch than anything by Michael Bay.

Some passages are among the most inspiring documentaries about the sheer depravity of the Holocaust, and the entire section in the concentration camp exudes a naturalistic effect comparable only to a small handful of actual video footage or survivors' accounts. But the film has immeasurable ambitions and tries to cover half of the protagonist's life, gradually switching rather disorderly between different formal and narrative stages and failing to hold the viewer's attention enough to justify its overlong 140 minutes. Still, I would have rather appreciated its historical and purely moral value if it wasn’t for that insanely forced ending, which in its tone and execution seems to have been cut from a completely different film. Great intentions unfortunately drowned in a jumble of great filmmaking efforts, some of which work brilliantly while others make it impossible to connect to the story in a fully empathetic way. Such a shame.

Confidently elevated filmmaking that establishes smoothly developed themes in a relentless rhythm and introduces characters that generate sympathy without deviating from the constant development of an informative working plane. It's not exactly the Mecca of my interests and the ending doesn't leave a very impressive educational punch, but from a purely formal point of view, there's nothing to complain about (especially the play with space and the transfer of focus gives the scenes an exemplary dynamism and freshness). Oh, and David Strathairn is definitely the most underrated actor of the past two decades.

Dedicated to the memory of Wes Craven, George A. Romero and Tobe Hooper. Leone intended it well, this is a pure unadulterated homage to the bloody horror industry, starring a psychopathic madman and an irrational bunch of hollow-headed victims. In that respect it’s OK, because the local clown butcher is scarier to look at than Jolanda in underwear, and his appearances are entertaining throughout. But in terms of filmmaking, it's just a big mess, where every good idea is followed by ten clichés and nothing surprising. Even from films whose primary goal is to disgust and physically exhaust the viewer, I demand a bit of logic and some originality and added value, which is all painfully lacking here (despite the ostentatiously proclaimed homage).

An immature project that only made it to the big screen thanks to The Rock's narcissistic personality. But I don't want to blame him, his dedication to an otherwise totally imbecilic flick is the main ingredient that elevates the film into watchable mediocrity – and maybe also Morgan’s charisma and the beauty of Naomi Harris. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of overgrown monsters with dramaturgy from the early fifties and barely an interesting scene or catchphrase. Pointless.